GOP furious about timing of Rumsfeld resignation

[Patrick Henry]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 width=490 border=0 valign="top"><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=2>GOP furious about timing of Rumsfeld resignation
By Patrick O'Connor (poconnor@thehill.com)
</TD></TR><TR><TD>Donald Rumsfeld's abrupt resignation from the Pentagon the day after Republicans lost both chambers of Congress has infuriated some GOP officials on and off Capitol Hill.
Members and staff still reeling from Tuesday's rout are furious about the administration's decision to dump the controversial defense secretary one day after their historic loss, they said in a series of interviews about the election results.

President Bush announced Rumsfeld's resignation on Wednesday and named Bob Gates, a former CIA chief and president of Texas A&M University, as his replacement.
"The White House said keeping the majority was a priority, but they failed to do the one thing that could have made a difference," one House GOP leadership aide said Thursday. "For them to toss Rumsfeld one day after the election was a slap in the face to everyone who worked hard to protect the majority."
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/110906/rumsfeld2.html

[DesertFox]

Members and staff still reeling from Tuesday's routWhat rout?

[Maggie_T]

What rubbish. That's right. Take it out on Rummy now, why don't you. You fokked up royally and now you talk about timing? What does it bloody matter when people resign at this point?

And don't give me "It will look like we caved to Pelosi," or any such idiocy. 'Pubs have been lacking a spine since 2004, and NOW they worry about looking bad?! Their lack of spine is what made them lose, remember?

So all this huffing and puffing comes as too little, too late. What they should be worrying about now is pulling their act together and start behaving like Reagan Republicans, and stop fretting about "what the press will say." Never mind who resigns when.

[Lazarus]

Yeah Yeah Yeah!!! The "GOP officials" in question have to be furious at something - anything to project their own gross failure on someone else...

Before you self-righteous jerks get too furious at someone else, I would refer you to Wyatt's very pointed and stark list of YOUR OWN utter failures during the 6 years you had absolute power in Washington...

Ya know, Rumsfeld might have quit because he was sick of having to depend on a bunch of gutless dweebs who became ashamed of and abandoned the Conservative base that sent them to Washington...

[Lubbock]

Well SCREW the GOP.

What's the GOP ever done for George Bush or Donald Rumsfeld?

Other than stab the two of them in the back, I can't see one damned thing the GOP has ever done to stand behind the President and his fight against the terrorists.

If the GOP had had taken a decisive stand and backed the President, his fight would have had one less enemy.

Democrats stand behind their own, no matter their sins of commission or omission, but not the GOP.

At the first sign of blood in the water, the GOP --too busy protecting their taxpayer-funded-feather-beds, desert like rats.

Can anyone imagine being in GWB's shoes and having to fight the Liberal Democrat Left, the LeftStreamMedia, and your own party?

Rangel calls Cheney a sonofabitch, and not one member of the GOP steps forward to defend him; every Democrat on the Hill calls GWB a liar, and not one member of the GOP steps forward to defend him; Democrats call Rumsfeld a war criminal, and accuse our brave soldiers of crimes, calls them cold blooded murders, and not one member of the GOP takes Rumsfeld's back.

SCREW the GOP.

I'm sick of the GOP.

The GOP is wHAT got us a Democrat controlled Congress --House and Senate.

The damned GOP wants to put it off on Bush. That a load of bullshit.

If the damned GOP had been as forceful and effective defending Bush as the Democrats were in denigrating him, we wouldn't have lost the House and the Senate.

SCREW THE GOP.

[Maggie_T]

Er, Lub. I think the GOP is screwed. :rolleyes:

[DoctorDoom]

No one will notice the GOP's demise when the RATs' insanity screws America.

[The_Elucidator]

No one will notice the GOP's demise when the RATs' insanity screws America.

Not unless it's written in spanish..

[MrSanity]

Was Rumsfeld fired, or was his resignation voluntary?

[The_Elucidator]

Was Rumsfeld fired, or was his resignation voluntary?

Yes

[MrSanity]

YesSorry? :listen:

[The_Elucidator]

In the military we had the term mandatory fun... this was either a mandatory resignation or he was voluntarily fired.

[Patrick Henry]

So, one has to ask, what good is Rumsfeld's firing/resignation? What purpose does it serve? My guess? A sacrificial offering to the democRATS.

Now, Bush is asking for 'suggestions' on Iraq - another sign of capitulation. I thought he had the right plan? You can't have it both ways.. unless you were winging it from the git-go.

[Nutrider99]

Ya know, Rumsfeld might have quit because he was sick of having to depend on a bunch of gutless dweebs who became ashamed of and abandoned the Conservative base that sent them to Washington...
Had Rumsfeld stayed in office, the democreep controlled Congress would be working to bring him up on war crimes and would demand that he apolgize for everything that has gone wrong, whether it was truly a failing or just democreep spin. That's because democreeps are by definition idiots and can't understand that in a war BOTH sides are trying to win. Bush was counting on holding the House and Senate. Had that happened, Rumsfeld would have remained.

[MrSanity]

In the military we had the term mandatory fun... this was either a mandatory resignation or he was voluntarily fired.Ahh, now it makes sense.

[MrSanity]

Had Rumsfeld stayed in office, the democreep controlled Congress would be working to bring him up on war crimes and would demand that he apolgize for everything that has gone wrong, whether it was truly a failing or just democreep spin. That's because democreeps are by definition idiots and can't understand that in a war BOTH sides are trying to win. Bush was counting on holding the House and Senate. Had that happened, Rumsfeld would have remained.Did the Dems REALLY plan to try Rummy for war crimes?

[Maggie_T]

Most assuredly. Just like they planned to impeach Bush.

Of course, now that they are all donning the bi-partisan mask, who knows. Guess we'll have to give it time.

[DesertFox]

So all the assholes who said nothing in Rumsfeld's defense over these last six years of his name being dragged thru the sewer daily by liberals -- these same do-nothing assholes are now furious with Rummy?

Shux.

[maxparrish]

Had Rumsfeld stayed in office, the democreep controlled Congress would be working to bring him up on war crimes and would demand that he apolgize for everything that has gone wrong, whether it was truly a failing or just democreep spin. That's because democreeps are by definition idiots and can't understand that in a war BOTH sides are trying to win. Bush was counting on holding the House and Senate. Had that happened, Rumsfeld would have remained.

Bush screwed up once more. An announcement a month ago might have helped the GOP in close races, an announcement a few weeks from now might have looked like an act of bipartisan generosity and gesture to the winner's request to 'get along' .

To do it the day after the election looks like despondent humiliation and surrender. He did not even wait until the bipartisan proposals were submitted by the Democrats, he hustled to sheepishly jettison the man

Just another Bush F'up.

[DesertFox]

Disagree. To have jettisoned Rummy before the elections would have looked like pandering for votes.

[maxparrish]

Disagree. To have jettisoned Rummy before the elections would have looked like pandering for votes. Sure it would have been pandering, and if done so a month or two ago it might have gotten the tiny number required to secure either Virginia and/or Montana.

The point is that the WORST time to fire someone is the day after one's defeated party is butt kicked. If not pandering, just what do you think THAT looks like?

Face it, Bush F'up.

[Jester21]

Bush f'd up by not firing Rumsfeld long ago.

[UnkHiram]

What rubbish. That's right. Take it out on Rummy now, why don't you. You fokked up royally and now you talk about timing? What does it bloody matter when people resign at this point?

And don't give me "It will look like we caved to Pelosi," or any such idiocy. 'Pubs have been lacking a spine since 2004, and NOW they worry about looking bad?! Their lack of spine is what made them lose, remember?

So all this huffing and puffing comes as too little, too late. What they should be worrying about now is pulling their act together and start behaving like Reagan Republicans, and stop fretting about "what the press will say." Never mind who resigns when.

Maggie

You really need to learn to stop beating around the bush and tell us what you really think.:rotflmbo:

[UnkHiram]

Did the Dems REALLY plan to try Rummy for war crimes?

MrSanity

They Still are!:flame:

[d'urville]

It would've helped the news be received better if Bush hadn't unconditionaly pledged to support Rumfeld right before the election.

So, one has to ask, what good is Rumsfeld's firing/resignation? What purpose does it serve? My guess? A sacrificial offering to the democRATS.

He's reverted to his Rockefeller Republican roots since around January of 2005. Bad enough with a friendly Congress, devastating with the new.


Now, Bush is asking for 'suggestions' on Iraq - another sign of capitulation. I thought he had the right plan? You can't have it both ways.. unless you were winging it from the git-go.

He's trying to save it from the cut-and-run policy, Rumsfeld could've helped, too late.

Bush does not understand what he's dealing with, he's trying to "reach out" and "work with" them in a bi-partisan manner. They're not interested.

The Democrats are just going to steamroll over him, their party is run by mostly irrational emotions.

[Patrick Henry]

Sure it would have been pandering, and if done so a month or two ago it might have gotten the tiny number required to secure either Virginia and/or Montana.

The point is that the WORST time to fire someone is the day after one's defeated party is butt kicked. If not pandering, just what do you think THAT looks like?

Face it, Bush F'up.

I agree with YOU. If firing Rumsfeld before the election looks like 'pandering' for votes as alleged, then firing him after is pandering for what? Sympathy? A re-count? Do-over? What does it accomplish AFTER the election? NOTHING!!! Not a damn thing!

This move says to America that democRATS were right all along and that Bush was WRONG! Hell, Al Qaeda calls it a victory for the insurgency!!! This move is a political disaster, who's the dumb*ss that made the suggestion? That's what I want to know.

[Patrick Henry]

It would've helped the news be received better if Bush hadn't unconditionaly pledged to support Rumfeld right before the election.

He's reverted to his Rockefeller Republican roots since around January of 2005. Bad enough with a friendly Congress, devastating with the new.

He's trying to save it from the cut-and-run policy, Rumsfeld could've helped, too late.

Bush does not understand what he's dealing with, he's trying to "reach out" and "work with" them in a bi-partisan manner. They're not interested.

The Democrats are just going to steamroll over him, their party is run by mostly irrational emotions.

By axing Rumsfeld he IS 'cutting and running'... from HIS POLICY! Therein lies the irony.

[DoctorDoom]

Had Rumsfeld stayed in office, the democreep controlled Congress would be working to bring him up on war crimes ...And now the Krauts want to do it.

Just days after his resignation, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is about to face more repercussions for his involvement in the troubled wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. New legal documents, to be filed next week with Germany's top prosecutor, will seek a criminal investigation and prosecution of Rumsfeld, along with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, former CIA director George Tenet and other senior U.S. civilian and military officers, for their alleged roles in abuses committed at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The plaintiffs in the case include 11 Iraqis who were prisoners at Abu Ghraib, as well as Mohammad al-Qahtani, a Saudi held at Guantanamo, whom the U.S. has identified as the so-called "20th hijacker" and a would-be participant in the 9/11 hijackings. As TIME first reported in June 2005, Qahtani underwent a "special interrogation plan," personally approved by Rumsfeld, which the U.S. says produced valuable intelligence. But to obtain it, according to the log of his interrogation and government reports, Qahtani was subjected to forced nudity, sexual humiliation, religious humiliation, prolonged stress positions, sleep deprivation and other controversial interrogation techniques.Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1557842,00.html)

The Axis of Weasels is alive and well. And you know that the RAT bastards will play along with it.

[Patrick Henry]

They can play along if they want to, but this stupid court has zero jurisdiction over a U.S. citizen here.

[Maggie_T]

MrSanity

They Still are!:flame:



Yep. I'll second that.

The liberals check-signers (Soros, Michael Moore, Blabs Streisand, etc.) will put such pressure on Pelosi et al to pull a Nuremberg on republicans, they'll give in eventually.

[Incident_command]

Yep. I'll second that.

The liberals check-signers (Soros, Michael Moore, Blabs Streisand, etc.) will put such pressure on Pelosi et al to pull a Nuremberg on republicans, they'll give in eventually.

I'm not so sure they will cave. It would be risky to put the war, in full, out in front of the public. Which is what a trial would do.They can control the news from Iraq, but it would be difficult to control whats coming out of a court room. If the rats do take this issue on, Rumsfeld and crew will make them look like fools.

If they were smart they would do nothing. Act like they support all our troops, give the republicans no issues, and hope to coast to the white house in 08.

[Maggie_T]

Incident, remember liberals have control of the drive-by media AND a good deal of the courts.